It has been suggested that we have an attentional bias toward threatening information, and that an unjustified bias may play a role in clinical anxiety. This series of experiments will examine the nature of these biases using a framework provided by current cognitive models of attention. Five specific questions will be addressed: 1) Do threatening stimuli attract attention to themselves more effectively than neutral stimuli? 2) Do threatening stimuli hold attention more effectively than neutral stimuli? 3) Do threatening faces and threatening words have similar effects on attention? 4) Are the effects of threatening stimuli related to individual differences in anxiety? 5) Does attentional bias to threat reflect a general bias for processing emotional information? Spatial attention will be examined using a spatial cueing paradigm, in which participants are cued to a spatial location and a target is then presented in either the cued or an un-cued location. Typically, responses are slower to targets in the un-cued location; the magnitude of this effect is an indicator of the rate at which attention moves from one location to the other. In three experiments, threatening, positive and neutral stimuli will be used as targets to examine their ability to attract attention. In three other experiments, threatening and neutral stimuli will be used as cues to evaluate their ability to hold attention. The attentional effects of both threatening faces and threatening words will be considered. Threat effects will be compared in participants with high and low levels of sub-clinical anxiety.